Allied Express Transport Pty Ltd v Braim [2022] NSWSC 1298

Allied Express Transport Pty Ltd v Braim [2022] NSWSC 1298

Allied was not entitled to the final restraints because it failed to prove that the pleaded categories of information were confidential information of Allied, that such information was imparted to Mr Braim in circumstances of confidence, or that he actually or threatenedly used or disclosed confidential information. Allied also failed to prove any actual or apprehended breach of the restriction on activities clause: the SPL exception allowed Mr Braim or ASOS to continue providing van services to SPL and was not limited to one van; ASOS was not shown to be in competition with Allied in the relevant sense; van services were not the same services as Mr Braim provided to SPL as Allied's...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 September 2022
Procedural Posture
Equity Proceeding Concerning Post Employment Restraints of Trade and Confidential Information / Separate Question Hearing on Allied's Entitlement to Final Restraints in Prayers 2, 3 and 3 a of the Amended Statement of Claim
Outcome
Allied's claims for final restraints failed; prayers 2, 3 and 3A of the Amended Statement of Claim were dismissed, and the interim undertakings and restraint were discharged.
Legal Topics
['post Employment Restraints' 'restraints of Trade Act 1976 (nsw)' 'contractual Confidentiality Obligations' 'equitable Obligations of Confidence' 'customer and Employee Non Solicitation Covenants' 'separate Question Determination']
['employment Law' 'contract Law' 'equity' 'restraint of Trade' 'confidential Information'] ['post Employment Restraints' 'restraints of Trade Act 1976 (nsw)' 'contractual Confidentiality Obligations' 'equitable Obligations of Confidence' 'customer and Employee Non Solicitation Covenants' 'separate Question Determination']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Equity Proceeding Concerning Post Employment Restraints of Trade and Confidential Information / Separate Question Hearing on Allied's Entitlement to Final Restraints in Prayers 2, 3 and 3 a of the Amended Statement of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Allied was entitled to restrain Mr Braim from activities said to breach the restriction on activities clause in his employment contract for 12 months after termination.' 'Whether Allied proved any actual or apprehended breach of the contractual restraints by Mr Braim or ASOS.' 'Whether the SPL exception permitted Mr Braim or his company to continue providing van services to SPL and whether it was limited to one van.' 'Whether information allegedly accessible to Mr Braim during employment was confidential information of Allied and had been imparted to him in circumstances importing contractual or equitable obligations of confidence.' 'Whether s 4 of the Restraint of Trade Act 1976 (NSW) applied to the employment restraint where the contract was governed by New South Wales law but relevant conduct occurred in Victoria.']

Ratio Decidendi

Allied was not entitled to the final restraints because it failed to prove that the pleaded categories of information were confidential information of Allied, that such information was imparted to Mr Braim in circumstances of confidence, or that he actually or threatenedly used or disclosed confidential information. Allied also failed to prove any actual or apprehended breach of the restriction on activities clause: the SPL exception allowed Mr Braim or ASOS to continue providing van services to SPL and was not limited to one van; ASOS was not shown to be in competition with Allied in the relevant sense; van services were not the same services as Mr Braim provided to SPL as Allied's...

Court Disposition

Allied's claims for final restraints failed; prayers 2, 3 and 3A of the Amended Statement of Claim were dismissed, and the interim undertakings and restraint were discharged.

Orders

  • ["Order that the plaintiff's claims for relief in prayers 2, 3 and 3A of the Amended Statement of Claim are dismissed." 'Order that (a) the undertakings of the defendants given to the Court and noted on 10 March 2022; and (b) order 1(a) made on 10 March 2022 are discharged forthwith.' 'The Court will hear the...